quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
...and for the record. I prefer my movies to just start please, completely devoid of any credits and such until the end.


Don't know if it is still true but the Academy requires the film Title, Director, Producer and maybe 1 or 2 other names to roll at the beginning or it will not be considered for an Academy award. There was controversy with a film that had the Title only (if I remember correctly) and was excluded from consideration. Conversely, at one time (maybe still true) some directors / producers put all the credits at the front because the film is so bad that you would not see the entire film or if you did, would wait for the credits to finish.
quote:
Don't know if it is still true but the Academy requires the film Title, Director, Producer and maybe 1 or 2 other names to roll at the beginning or it will not be considered for an Academy award.

I can name several examples of films from the past 10 years that won / were nominated for Oscars without this being the case. So, if it was ever true, it isn't now.
quote:
Originally posted by aphilla:
The Music Man

Which has a great opening scene. Just a cool number I guess.

Re-watched a number of years ago and was really impressed with the choreography, particularly the number in the library. Robert Preston was just so talented.
On the opening credit debate. All movies used to open with all the credits first. I think that changed in the 1960s. However Citizen Kane (what else?) bucked that in the 1941. It appears that the first sound picture to do this was Fantasia, but unlike CK, it's a non-linear collection of "music videos."

While researching I was reminded that Touch of Evil has no opening credits, but that when it was first released it had been butchered by the studio and had credits during the, as noted, great opening sequence. This is the version I'd always seen. It wasn't until the great editor, Walter Murch restored it using Welles notes in 1998 that we could truly appreciate Welles' vision. I saw this in the theatre at that time I was in heaven. If only the same thing could be done with The Magnificent Ambersons, but alas the components do not exist.
quote:
Originally posted by The Old Man:


While researching I was reminded that Touch of Evil has no opening credits,


I cannot imagine opening credits in this movie. Having some credits rolling as the bomb is ticking would ruin the first 3 1/2 minutes of genius.

Opening credits would also have ruined Apocalypse Now, an awesome opening scene.
quote:
Originally posted by mneeley490:
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
quote:
Originally posted by mneeley490:
I dunno, I kinda liked the opening sequence in Casino Royale.


Circa '67? Big Grin


I'd rather be tied to a chair and forced to watch Gigli 100 times, then that POS.


Big Grin That was my assumption, but thought the '67 movie might have been during your psychedelic stage of life. Wink
Ok,

So, first of all, how is a discussion of greatest opening scenes happening without Apocalypse Now being mentioned?

Most of my favorite movies have fantastic opening scenes that really, in one way or another, throw you into the story whilst making the viewer care. Movies that have yet to be mentioned from The Producers (1967) to the narrative techniques of The Lord of the Rings and The Princess Bride are amongst my favorites. The subtlety of the opening sequences of A Room With a View set against the romance of "O Mio Babbino Caro." So many of my favorite movies have great opening scenes.

Now, all that said, last night I watched:
Pitch Perfect

Stay with me on this review, because I may be on to a new concept ("EIR"(c)) here...

Some movies try to be stupid and through that find humor and/or quality. 99% of these movies, however, are, in fact, just stupid -- often horrendous. Think most Adam Sandler movies. Then occasionally, a movie tries to find comedy or warmth or something good through stupidity and succeeds. See Kingpin. Of course, I think it takes a certain level of intelligence to make a movie a stupid as Kingpin, and so hilariously, at that. What is true of all these movies, though, is that they are actively trying to be stupid. And you can tell watching them, "Oh. They are trying to be stupid."

There was nothing added to Pitch Perfect to make it more stupid. It doesn't feel like the writer said, "you know how I could really dumb this down?..." Instead, as a concept, as a self-contained, every-piece-in-sync, there is no "deeper", this movie is quite possibly the single stupidest feature length motion picture I have seen in years.

Also, I really liked it. But more on that in a minute.

There is no character development, family relationships are used only as plot devices and are never... I can't even get into that. The music (because, you know, this is about boys vs. girls competitive collegiate a cappella groups) goes from moderate suckitude to full blown 'horrible rendition of Ace of Base' (yes, Ace of Base) catastrophic, perhaps-why-there-is-trouble-in-the-Middle-East suckitude. Dialogue? I swear, I swear, the most intelligent line in the movie, is "I ate my twin in the womb." And, given the above conversation, let me suggest not eating during the opening sequence.

All of that having been said, I enjoyed this movie. IMO, Anna Kendrick can do no wrong (except for being marginally involved in Twilight). And she really, actually shined here. Virtually everyone did, the other standout being Rebel Wilson. While this extraordinarily dumbed-down rip off of Bring it On should have been dreck, the performances were all just straight enough that they weren't winking at the camera, and just loose enough that I understood, that they all understood what sort of movie they were in. For reasons that escape me, I got somewhat emotionally invested in a couple of the characters. And there were a few times I laughed out loud... once pretty hard. It was light, and most of all, "fun".

Which brings me back to EIR. Or, Enjoyment/Intelligence Ratio. This movie has one of the very highest EIRs I've ever come across. It got an 81% on Rotten Tomatoes (78% "Top Critics") and while I cannot fully articulate why a strong majority recommendation makes sense to me for this movie, it actually does. I enjoyed it, a lot. But, wow is it stupid.
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
Ok,

So, first of all, how is a discussion of greatest opening scenes happening without Apocalypse Now being mentioned? Look a couple of post before this one, Former)

The subtlety of the opening sequences of A Room With a View set against the romance of "O Mio Babbino Caro. Greatness. ( which Opera, Sir?)
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
The subtlety of the opening sequences of A Room With a View set against the romance of "O Mio Babbino Caro. Greatness. ( which Opera, Sir?)

Well, Gianni Schicchi, but I had to look it up.

quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
Ok,

So, first of all, how is a discussion of greatest opening scenes happening without Apocalypse Now being mentioned? Look a couple of post before this one, Former)

Figures you would be the one to mention it Wink
quote:
Originally posted by aphilla:
I was really looking forward to The Lone Ranger but seems like it's getting thoroughly panned. Anyone been?

Haven't seen it, but it sounds like Armie Hammer's name is going to go down in infamy along with Klinton Spisbury.

Perhaps no one can live up to the level of Clayton Moore? He wasn't the greatest actor in the world either, but he just inhabited that role.
Shakespeare in Love

Stoppard's ability to add to the canon of Shakespeare is beyond remarkable. Obviously, Rosencratz and Guildenstern are Dead did not translate well into a movie. But every time I come back to one of these works after a long period of time, I'm still shocked how wonderfully he was able to meld his world with that of Shakespeare's.

Gwyneth at her best, too.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×